What's your guys opinion on it?
I'm not liking the board wipe options control has. Seems a bit undercosted for what they have access to.
>>44055030
Right now control as we know it does not exist in standard. Everything is either a slow aggro deck such as Jeskai, or a midrange deck such as Abzan. That is unless you include the absolute abortion that is "Atarka Red", also known as "Pile it all on one guy and hope they don't have removal". Sure some decks splash a 4th colour, but that doesn't change the core. The last 2 years of standard can be summed up by Siege Rhino for a reason.
>>44055328
>Right now control as we know it does not exist in standard
I was wondering why Standard seems to be fun right now which is weird because I've never ever thought this before. Guess that's a reason.
>>44056730
The problem with control is that it is fundamentally about telling the other player that they don't get to play the game. Cycles where control is 'viable' from our perspective really means cycles where control wrecks your shit. There isn't a lot of wiggle room for control decks being effective, you either lock down the game and win or you don't and you lose.
A cycle where control is viable almost always means a cycle where control is the ONLY deck that is viable, because the non-control decks will get BTFO by control unless they control harder back.
For the vast majority of players, its much more fun to have a game go 'we both play creatures with different powers and effects, and then have them fight to see who wins' then 'I play a creature on my turn and leave two mana up. On your turn I counterspell that thing you wanted to do, GG so back to my turn now right?'
creatures rarely resolve at my lgs. its kinda boring
>>44056916
See, control is only unfun and broken when you don't know how to play against it. Bait out the counters when they leave mana open. Play resilient threats that dodge their spot removal or are still useful if removed. Force them to tap out for a board wipe early and use the chance to slam a key spell (outpost siege works wonders). They're trying to anticipate your moves. Anticipate back.
The real problem with control is it forces you into a very mentally taxing game every time you play against it.
>>44060069
All of that depends on having a waaaay better hand than them AND playing it very well.
Baiting out their counterspells sounds like a smart thing to say, but it really just means having more good things than they have counters + enough mana to cast both at once and decide which one is worth keeping. Not having enough mana to cast both in one turn is no different from flushing a turn and a card down the drain, and no one is going to waste a counter on you EagerCadet only to be flummoxed because your next play was Seige Rhino.
Sure, you can make your deck by a rolling ball of hexproof uncounterable creatures with ETB triggers. But that means 'knowing how to play against control' means 'restricting yourself to the 0.2% of magic cards ever printed that don't get buttfucked by control, isn't this fun?'
Your last line of 'The real problem with control is it forces you into a very mentally taxing game every time you play against it.' is complete hogwash, because that makes it sound like winning against control is a matter of how you play it instead of what you have to play. If your deck isn't specifically made to be as control-proof as possible, it doesn't matter in what order you play your goblins, you are still getting controlled because you didn't play simic uncounterable hexproof creatures with flicker instead.
>>44055030
I thought UW had like three boardwipes available to use. 4+ if you go esper
>>44060330
I remeber the first time i played magic too. But hurt like this is why BFZ was such a terrible set.
>>44060069
>The real problem with control is it forces you into a very mentally taxing game every time you play against it.
not really. i mean, not standard control. you can know the exact sequence of spells that you have to play and play against by the second land drop.
>>44060330
You're also assuming that the opponent always has a perfect hand with infinite copies of counterspell in it.
There are lots of ways to beat control, and lots of resources to teach you. Just because you sit there and let them outplay you at every turn does not make it unbeatable.
>>44060330
/tg/ being shit at magic, as usual.
>>44062156
>>44060069
control is fundementally unfun to play against, is it unfair? well it has been a few times in certain standards.
the REAL problem with control is that it is quite easy for control to get "out of hand" as it doesn't exactly have as many needs as a deck-concept to be strong as other decks.
all control every needs to be strong is cheap removal, cheap counters, and good wipes.
the win condition is almost irrelevent, its always been some blue thing thats hard to kill, and it always existed.
also another way control becomes an issue is when other decks simply don't have a strategy they can have, main or side that is good enough, see RTR's Blue white only having Mono B to worry about, or the Cawblade Jace times.
also Control decks are the only decks that get this oppressive, Seige Rhino is nothing compared to older control decks.
It's boring as shit right now. 3/4 color good stuff decks reign supreme and I hate it. Innistrad can't come sooner but I'm worried they're gonna fuck it up somehow.
>>44055030
Boring as shit right now, the power level of BfZ was so low that everyone is stuck using the same shit we've been seeing all along.
Also fuck Standard, this format is the reason why nothing good ever sees print
>Maro designing a card
B-b-but it'll be too powerful for standard!!! Better nerf the shit out of it
>>44065414
I just know that the best mythic in Gatewatch is going to be White, or Green, or White Green.
just watch, Abzan gets just one more hurrah till the day it fucking dies.
Quickly. Someone tell me a easy infinite mana loop
>>44065483
I was honestly shocked by BFZ, it was their chance to break the Abzan meta before it became pointless to do so.
and all we get out of it for playables is a single white mythic.
there are entire teir 1 decks in standard that use 1-0 non land cards from BFZ like the set didn't even exist.
has that EVER happened in standard? even Born of the Gods had 2-3 mythics and 2-3 rares that people played.
>>44060069
so what winds up happening is you end up playing psuedo control vs control. you're trying to outcontrol the control deck.
oh boy that sure does sound like fun.
>>44065709
its what all the really big "wannabe" spike players want standard to be.
its the kind of faggot who looks back to the JtMS days and wants it back.
Thanks to bfz the game finally feels like magic, as in creatures duking it out and casting occasional spells to influence the board. Its not retarded broken with "hurr ramp turn 3 bomb" and its not too control heavy. Its more about synergy and archetypes. This is the best standard and draft environment magic has had in years.
>>44065784
not really? the big winner in this standard are...
Atarka red, they kill you on turn 4 unless you kill literally all the creatures they've played up till now, more a combo deck than a red-aggro deck, the "interaction" they have is killing you on turn 4, the interaction you have is "kill 3 creatures and you win"
Abzan Aggro, this is the one you are correct on, however, somewhere it went horribly horribly wrong in that all the value creatures and spells just happened to line up in its colors, literally the only spell that doesn't line up in its colors is one off, a red black white spell, crackling doom.
as far as "Value.dek" is concerned it is almost unheard of for all the value creatures and spells to be in a single 3 color combination in a standard.
and....
Esper Tokens, a somewhat control deck that regularly loses to Atarka red, and even Abzan aggro a deck it should beat, but 50% of the time it still can't.
the rest are out outliers, my favorite deck is Rally and its the least interractive deck of them all, you just Rally a few times and your opponent is dead if it resolves and you don't have to care what they are doing unless one of their creatures reads "Anafenza the Foremost".
>>44060330
You think like that, then you play on curve against control
>You never play on curve against control
>>44066826
>waiting until control players can use two counters a turn or a counter and a dig, or worse, two counters and a dig.
no thanks.
>>44055030
It looks dumb, like everyone is just picking 4 colors and throwing the most powerful cards in those colors into a deck and calling it a deck. Tom Ross is still playing infect for the second straight standard
>>44065784
I dunno. It seems like with aristocrats or allies, I run a deck with 20-30 creatures and beat my opponent without interacting with him at all. The pendulum may have swung so far from control that we're back to control without even realizing it.
>>44055328
What are you talking about exactly? Control makes up a reasonable part of the meta and has a great match up vs Abzan which makes up a huge part of the meta.. Even vs Atarka Red it's not the worst especially post sideboard.
>>44065784
You are fucking dumb, I'm not going to say I helped make magic but I've been playing since 8th edition. I love creature decks too, I mostly run creature heavy decks. Magic needs control and burn and removal cheap and available at low raritys that don't have crazy restrictions. It's possible to play against control, burn and combo decks with the same deck even. I have a shitty red white walls deck its anthems and walls and 4 pacifisms but it wins against modern decks, legacy burn and other "unfun" archetypes. Both people enjoy the game too and yes I lose games too still have fun. Just learn how to play and you learn that control and removal are important to the games fun and survivability. We need to move away from such a creature heavy meta its toxic and unfun and you don't feel like a wizard you feel like a zoo keeper and I love creature but even I have had to much
>>44055030
Control is pretty good in the current meta but it's not "traditional" control with lots of counterspells and board wipes. The current control decks use cheap 1-for-1 removal and value creatures like Tasigur, Jace and Ojutai.
>>44055030
Strictly inferior to Terror. Will only see standard and block play.
>>44075600
It's 2015 and you STILL don't know what 'strictly better/inferior' means?
Here's the bottom line. A lot of people say control is a very skill intensive deck and I suppose I can give that some credence; played prefectly in a vacuum vs Abzan for example it's quite a favorite by quite a lot whereas otherwise it would be a marginal favorite. The problem is it takes away from the other players experience in that their choices are very limited and thereby reduces the skill the opposer needs to muster. You hear people talking about "baiting removal/counterspells" but there's really not a lot of wiggle room. Either you have that line or you don't. Either they have the answer to your threat or they don't. Quite often facing a midrange deck as control ends up in either midrange curves out and delivers enough threats to win early or it goes to attrition and the midrange player loses. Sure you can make misteps or nice plays here and there but you don't really have a game of magic you're playing against the dealer in black jack.
>>44075600
We're talking about standard so technically ultimate price is strictly better than terror in this case. Why you would feel the need to bring that up I can't imagine unless trolling of course.
>>44075935
Agreed, control can be difficult to play in that you need to know where and when to use your removal and counterspells. But that's just something that can be learned through practice, just like playing Abzan midrange or Atarka Red.
>>44074966
>you don't feel like a wizard you feel like a zoo keeper
This has been my beef with magic for while now.
>>44074966
so we need to move back towards the "Dark Ritual and Yawgmoths Will" meta, because that wasn't toxic or unfun or broken or anything.
"spells are good" usually mean "spells are fucking broken holy shit look what I can do on turn 3"
>>44079331
>>44079331
That's literally the foundation of magic though. Being a summoner.
People that dislike playing against control as a rule are either bad at the game or have never played in an interesting environment.
Probably both
>>44055328
Esper Dragons is a deck. Also, Atarka Red doesn't just 'pile it onto one guy', if you play against people who do that they're bad.
>>44065124
>all control every needs to be strong is cheap removal, cheap counters, and good wipes.
And when was the last time we had that? RTR- Theros standard? Wizards has been pandering to the baddies, casuals, and noobs for years now by slowly killing all three of those things, so I hope they're happy.
>>44065784
The game is called Magic: The Gathering not Creatures: The Sidewaysing. If you want to watch big dumb monsters crashing together, go play Pokemon, don't infect my hobby with your philistine cancer.
>>44080622
Fuck off retard theres obviously a middle ground
And they could at least give us decent removal spells instead of 3rd rate copies of 2nd rate cards
>>44081143
>casting instants to fuck over my opponent mid turn and having my enchantments do all the work means this game is sophisticated.
The basis of this game is creature combat. the fact is more creature cards are printed each set than any other type. spells are supposed to have an effect on creatures and the board state. spells shouldn't determine the entire game.
>>44081211
Creatures are spells too, timmy
BfZ is trash, theres nothing really that great in the set
Once Khans and fate rotate standard will really suck
>>44081211
>casting instants to fuck over my opponent mid turn and having my enchantments do all the work means this game is sophisticated.
Because I totally said that, right? Fuck off with the strawman.
>The basis of this game is creature combat.
It is so obvious that you have only been playing for a year or two at most, because that's how long the game's been about creature combat.
> the fact is more creature cards are printed each set than any other type
For most of Magic's history, creatures have been worse than spells. But then casuals and shitters like you came along and started whining and crying that your big monsters were getting removed, so MaRo surrendered and made the game what it is now.
>spells are supposed to have an effect on creatures and the board state. spells shouldn't determine the entire game.
Says who? The ten-year-old Timmys who only play 20 land 40 creature decks? That actually makes sense, since Standard seems to be mostly made up of those.
>>44081272
>44081272
standard will be fixed when they rotate because we'll get back to the essence of magic.
fetch-lands broke standard.
Now it'll require actual deck building finesse to create a synergistic strategy not just copying the same 3 deck lists for months.
>>44081292
all this text and you still failed to explain why, in your opinion, a creature-fight dominant meta is worse than a spell dominant one.
You seem like you're just upset that the game no longer caters to your specific playstyle. Maybe you just don't like change.
>>44081305
lol nope standard is gonna suck for a couple years now because apparently in the eyes of shit tards, khans broke the game, and now we are forced into low power trash
I guess standard babbys cant handle a few modern level cards, and now we must all suffer
>>44081292
I've pulled up your decklist on tappedout and it consists of exactly 20 lands and 40 removal spells.
>>44081371
>turn 4 wins are perfectly acceptable.
kill yourself.
>>44081339
Because it's boring as shit. I don't feel like a wizard trying to outsmart my enemy with spell and skill, I feel like a Pokemon trainer yelling GO SQUIRTLE and crashing my Siege Rhinos into his Siege Rhinos until one of us comes out on top.
Yeah, I am upset that the game doesn't cater to my playstyle, just like you would be if it were the other way around. Doesn't mean my feeling is invalid.
>>44081378
You've never even tried to play a control deck, have you? Because if that's your idea of what it is, then just stop, you're embarrassing yourself.
>>44081371
You do realize how small the meta is now thanks to fetchlands. There are really only 4 maybe 5 "correct" builds. this shit is in no way fun.
>>44081423
are you retarded? there are still plenty of good spells and creature abilities you can activate. the game just feels a little less one sided lately and with a little more emphasis on creatures. the fuck are you whining about?
>>44081402
>Having to use silkwrap and ruinous path because theyre the "best" removal available
>Lightning strike is too good for standard
>Cancel at rare
You first, but take wizards cock out of your mouth so your parents dont find you like that
>>44081454
>good spells
Name one that isn't removal or a planeswalker.
>creature abilities
So I don't have to use creatures, but I do have to use creatures. That's what you're saying.
>the game just feels a little less one sided
If you're a troll, then congratulations you got me, but if not, then holy fuck you are a drooling retard. How is having a format where your options are slow aggro or midrange "less one sided"? How is killing an entire archetype making things more even. I seriously can't tell if you actually believe the bullshit you're spewing.
>>44081476
>wah no 1 drop removal spells
>b..but 3 damage for 2 mana is perfectly balanced
I like how you're only listing burn and removal as if they're the only spells that matter in the game. All the while completely proving my point.
>>44081538
>3 damage for 2 mana is too strong
This is what Standard players actually believe.
Give up your shitty format and move over to Modern and EDH, where you can still drop $800 on a deck and have it still be valuable six months from now, or just drop $150 on a deck and still be competitive.
>>44081585
>modern
>better than standard
modern players fail to understand that it's really just a broken version of standard.
>>44081538
Your point doesnt make sense
You want only creatures, but you dont want good removal to deal with your opponent's creatures
I didnt say anything about 1 drop kills, but it would be nice to have removal that isnt a 3 drop sorcery
Faggot children like you are the reason people hat standard
If they arent printing SOME cards that are better than previous ones theres no reason to buy them
>>44081614
Standard players dont understand that while expensive, modern isnt the money trashcan that standard is
If modern is too hard for you, stay away from EDH because good players with good cards will rape you
>>44081614
Confirmed for never having tried the format. I bet you think broken means being able to win before turn 7. There are over a dozen tournament-viable deck archetypes in Modern, how many are there in your shit-tier baby format? Four, maybe five?
Actually, you know what, keep on playing Standard. In six months, when your $800 deck is worth $100, maybe you'll be able to sell some of it back to afford the next rotation. Enjoy your format!
>>44081623
Nobody said the game is or should be ONLY about creatures. removal is important but it isn't the end all be all
jesus fuck. from a game design pov it's necessary to prevent power creep, and reset the game power level. It's necessary to print new cards that are just as strong but a little costlier for this to work. Sure people will get their panties in a knot "its strictly worse than X!!" but its for the best. It leads to a greater emphasis on decision making where you're no longer casting board state changing or game changing spells practically for free and makes the game more accessible to beginners. MaRo-sama understands the game could easily die if the power level gets too high and if the game is not inviting to new players.
Everything that will happen to standard over the next two years will be for the betterment of the game overall.
don't like it, fine play modern. But just because you can't understand game design and can't accept the new normal doesn't mean it's bad.
>>44081669
Winning before turn 5 is absolutely broken. 7 is still a stomp but not totally unreasonable.
cardpool ratio.
So is the reason you're really upset because standard is expensive?
>>44081669
>being this much of a metasheep
>not playing an aristocrats deck
>>44081771
>Maro cares about the game
>Changes arent just to get new player's money before they quit
>I've been playing for 20+ years and i dont understand game design, while you have been playing less than 5 and do
I just want reasonably good cards, which the last set totally failed to provide
If the meta is all creatures, i want decent removal spells not worse hero's downfall, and the worst burn spells ever in standard
>>44056916
>A cycle where control is viable almost always means a cycle where control is the ONLY deck that is viable, because the non-control decks will get BTFO by control unless they control harder back.
Funny you should say that because aggro traditionally beats control. Aggro > Control > Combo > Aggro. The reason why standard feels so bad right now is because this balance means absolutely nothing in standard. You've got aggro decks losing to midrange decks, and no control decks to beat the midrange decks, so everything is midrange.
Siege Rhino, Ojutai, Silumgar, it's all the same value midrange shit with a different coat of paint.
And if you don't like being told that you don't get to play the game, maybe you should become a better player so you can turn around and say yes you do.
>>44065124
>see RTR's Blue white only having Mono B to worry about
The BR aggro lists floating around had a really good matchup against UW control. The problem was that the deck could NOT beat mono U, because oh by the way I just happen to have a red and black creature here so Mogis's Marauder doesn't do much for you :^)
>>44082184
>And if you don't like being told that you don't get to play the game, maybe you should become a better player so you can turn around and say yes you do.
I'm using this at my lgs.
>>44081292
the problem was that creatures were pointless things for eon's.
people only played creatures that were also "sorceries" too, and that was that.
you are pining for the days of Yawgmoths will and Co. those were not good days and they weren't balanced days.
>>44081816
I bet you think counterspells are OP.
>>44082435
Counter Spell is a little too cheap
Cancel is better.
>>44082525
Fuck off Mark.
>>44082184
> And if you don't like being told that you don't get to play the game, maybe you should become a better player so you can turn around and say yes you do.
> I play a creature because of course I do
> "I counter that spell" he says, tapping two islands. So confident that there is nothing I can do to stop him
> I look him dead in the eyes and softly whisper something
> "What was that?" He asks, worried. He knows what is coming.
> "Thats just a copy of Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded." I repeat.
> He looks down, and it is. There he is holding the worst Planeswalker ever printed. Its not even in his colors.
> he calls for a judge, but it is already too late. There is no proof that he ever had a counterspell in the first place
> frantically, he checks his deck.
> Instead of three different varieties of counterspell at different costs, his deck has 11 copies of Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded.
> The judge disqualifies him for illegal deck construction
Truly, Magic as the game was always meant to be played.
>>44082540
you know it's true.
>>44082565
Cancel is unplayable in all formats. Even limited.
>>44082588
you WOT MATE?
Cancel is FINE in limited.
>>44082588
balanced is the word you were searching for.
its unplayable now but when the sets rotate it will be a good choice.
>>44082565
But if I can't invalidate you entire turn by spending only a tiny fraction of my available resources, why bother even playing blue?
>>44082602
You're happy with being forced to run strictly worse versions of current cards?
>>44082525
Player A casts a spell for 5 cmc
Player B counter spells for 2 cmc
>This is balanced
>>44082627
"strictly worse" won't even matter because there won't be any alternatives soon. the so called strictly worse card will be the only option. welcome to the new normal. Welcome to getting closer to having a balanced game.
>>44082614
evasion, and control.
not ass raping your opponent every time he goes to play something.
>hehe I end my turn with 2 mana up now I can counter anything he tries to put down.
>>44082627
Can you even play counter spell in standard?
So why even bring up the strictly worse argument when talking about standard?
>>44082642
>"strictly worse" won't even matter because there won't be any alternatives soon
Yes it will matter because this is the kind of shit that makes people not want to play standard.
And if anything we're getting FURTHER from a balanced game. Abzan is taking up 28% of all top 8 slots in standard right now, and it's basically been the same since Khans dropped. Nothing has been this pervasive since fucking Cawblade.
>>44082683
yes, you can "Silumgar's Scorn"
>>44082664
this is a poor idea, you go to counter their shit and they dispel or something.
Standard babbies these days don't know what it's like to clench your butthole every main phase and hope your big play resolves.
>>44082700
motherfucker the only time players dropped from standard formats is when shit got broken as fuck.
Urza block, Mirrodin block and Jace the MIndsculptor times were the all time lows of magic and always have been.
"Combo Winter" is probably the lowest point in magic history and was dominated by spells completely.
"powerful" times in magic are not balanced or fun times in magic, and turn people off.
>>44082735
nigger you weren't even playing pre Apocalypse/Invasion.
you don't know fucking shit, you didn't get a fucking mainphase if this was Urza Block standard, you were lucky to get to your own fucking turn, your shit resolving was the least of your worries.
no one played counter spells during Combo Winter because YOU LOST on turn 0 or turn 1, turn 2 if they had a iffy hand.
>>44082729
>Silumgar's Scorn
still requires an additional cost which isn't that big of a deal and the opponent has a chance to invalidate it if they have 1
Its not counter spell.
>>44082770
there are people in this thread right now that want this kind of shit to return...
>>44082778
which is good, they don't want the RTR times to come back and you shouldn't either.
they give you Counter spell with conditions because they sure as fuck aren't giving me Arcbound Ravager, even with conditions.
so you take your "somewhat" counterspell that needs a dragon and you like it bitch, cause if it Had "somewhat" Arcbound ravagers our "somewhat" Tinker your ass would be so fucking inverted you'd be in sucked back inside the 4th iteration of itself.
now go sleeve up Esper and think your playing like the big boys back in the day.
>>44082825
I am fine with all of this if it means a more balanced, more fun game.
>>44082802
NO ONE in this thread crying for the "powerful Spell times" played even a SINGLE FUCKING GAME till fucking Ravnica.
that is a fucking fact.
you motherfuckers would be the saltiest bitches in the universe if you played against an Urza block deck, and you'd go back on your own words in an instant and cry for "creatures matters" formats that you have now.
I can win with this without even playing a LAND on turn ONE.
>>44082862
lol
you don't know shit, "everything broken" leads to Yugioh.
you would be a whiny bitch playing against this deck during mirrodin block just like you'd whine against >>44082879
tinker during Urza block.
because your a contrarian bitch who has no concept of what you ask.
>>44082910
>>44082879
so you're happy with this shitty meta right now?
>>44082936
it is far more interactive and thought provoking than what you think the older formats where, which were all combo formats, all of them, almost entirely, for like 10 straight years.
>entire thread
>>44082729
> this is a poor idea, you go to counter their shit and they dispel or something.
So the most horrifying thing that can happen to your counterspell based strategy is that your opponent is also playing counterspells?
Gosh, I guess the hardship is real. Won't anyone think of the blue players?
>>44080745
No your thinking of creatures the summoning, this is magic the gathering. Where we do all kinds of magic, sometimes we summon a hydra, sometimes we throw a fire ball, sometimes we talk to otherworldly forces to learn about ourselves and the world around us, and sometimes we make a plant grow to break a magic bomb we made.
>>44083170
Sure, but you can't deny that the vast majority of the cards in the game are creature focused. Playing creatures, killing creatures, making your creatures stronger, making enemy creatures weaker, letting your creatures do things or perform combat tricks or whatever.
A smaller percentage of the game focuses on enchantments and artifact removal or manipulation, but a large number of those artifacts and enchantments are just ways of making effects to creatures last more than one turn anyway.
Only a tiny fraction of the cards of the game are about dealing with things that are totally non-creature related. This is where you find your direct damage to player spells, your mills, you win the game without ever looking at the boardstate combos.
For the game to be balanced, these cards HAVE to be kind of crap at what they do. That's not up for debate. Because by their very nature they ignore large parts of the rest of the game to get their effect, which makes them inherently more powerful that effects or damage that can be blocked by a defending boardstate.
We have had periods in magic where Red was totally able to just bolt you in the face over and over and never play a single creature, killing you faster than your creatures could hope to defend you. I'm pretty sure every color has had its time to shine in comboland, though blue and black tend to get the most toys on that front. These are lulzy and legendary, but no one wants to go back to those times. They were not fun to play against, and speaking as someone who abused the crap out of this shit back in the day? It got old to play too.
Everyone would go to the magic store, pull out their early game win combo decks, and the game would be over in less time than it took to shuffle. Then there would be that awkward silence until someone suggest we actually PLAY MAGIC, at which point we bust out 'inefficient' creature decks and had fun for the next ten or fifteen minutes.
>>44083095
Yes, by all means think of the blue players. They are the most shafted by the current meta.
http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/a-card-level-analysis-of-2014-2015-standard/
>>44083348
do you remember legacy elves or goblins cause I do, it was creatures only creatures and lands but you want to talk about non interactive that was some non interaction. I play my elf and then my other elf and then my other elf. Played against them a lot in my early days and they were not that fun to play against.
I agree that magic does need to be interactive what we have now isn't the best magic can be and isn't interactive cause creatures attacking isn't interactive in its self you know that.
Magic needs counters and removal, draw and naturalizes, buffs and debuffs, graveyard hate and hand hate also life gain. It needs them to be worth playing when not attached to a 3/2 for 3 too.
Creatures are currently to strong or spells to weak there needs to be a balance. We haven't found a good place yet. I personally preferred Ravnica, time spiral, and yes Kamigawia in regards to power level I felt that was a nice fit fro magic,not to say there weren't issues with these sets but I vastly prefer them to current sets.
Also yes in the bast burn was a powerful archetype but now it's not even an archetype. Magic need the diversity that comes from burn and control. I would be more than pleased that with every standard cycle there was a T2 burn and control deck archetype going around.
You are right magic shouldn't be over turn 1 but thats no reason to nix all of combo, burn and control to near unplayability. It must be controlled tightly and tested often. Which is one reason magic has abandoned it, to much work.
>>44082184
>And if you don't like being told that you don't get to play the game, maybe you should become a better player so you can turn around and say yes you do.
I can confirm that there is nothing more satisfying than running a Temur deck in standard that's half "big dumb creatures and ramp" and half "fuck control" counterspells.
>play a Knuckleblade
>other guy playing 4-colour rares memerange taps for a Crackling Doom
>Stubborn Denial
>mfw he bitches about me running counterspells when he's running the most memey meta deck in the format
this is why multiplayer EDH is great
very few decks are consistent enough to make suboptimal decks unplayable
Blue is the best color, sure, thats an eternal format given
U/G can be pretty hard to overcome, sure
but overall, the games go slow enough that any deck type has a chance (except full-agro, life totals are too high, but the thing is, there's group slug, which takes the place of sligh in EDH, and its a lot of fun and can be quite powerful)
sad that wotc doesnt print good control cards anymore?? thats okay becaues you can make a control deck from older cards
dont like having your shit countered and "not being able to play the game"?? I got good news for you, EDH is the one format where you can actually use a bunch of control-hoser cards like Price of Glory, War's Toll, Vexing Shusher, etc in your mainboard and still have plenty of room for the stuff that you didnt want to get counterspelled
edh has the highest number of viable deck strategies, and you dont have to worry about preferring this block's meta or that block's meta, you can use your favorite cards no matter when they were printed !!
>>44084628
That all sounds great, but unfortunately the casual nature of EDH makes for huge variances in power levels between decks and it's a multiplayer format, which I've never found fun in Magic.
>>44082879
i'd rather go back to stax, S&T, chingchong rector, carnophage hatred, getting all my lands capsized old magic than memerhino-blocking-memerhino joke of a game that exists right now
but thanks for the grog you dumb neckbeard, you truly are the only person in the entire world to cast a turn 1 dream halls
>>44081424
Fucking this. It's not because it's a "creature meta" like everyone's arguing about. It's because the perfect mana has basically killed synergistic deckbuilding, everyone just plays all the best cards mashed together. And if you try to make something with synergy, like a U/W awaken deck or a colorless aggro deck you just get your shit pushed in by Rhino/Jace and friends.
>>44084834
>memerhino
you don't know what the word meme is do you kid?
>>44084744
French is 1v1 and most people have multiple commander decks of differing powerlevels for that reason
>>44080622
>Muh false dichotomy
>>44055030
>not posting superior Head In A Bag art
>>44055328
>"Pile it all on one guy and hope they don't have removal"
You're thinking of Heroic. Unless they had God's Willing.
Ohhhh, Titan's Strength + Temur Battle Rage with God's Willing backup...
boners.
>>44081423
CRACKLING DOOOOOOM
>>44081666
Congratulations you are literally Satan.
EDH is best format. Modern is maybe fourth. Maybe fifth. Definitely less fun than standard.
>>44055030
http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=11057&f=ST
>>44055030
I think a better question would be how will the meta change once khans rotate. What do you guys think?
No fetches might stop the spash fest, maybe leading to more variance in the cards being played.
Also without anafenza aristocrats might see top level play.
I wonder what kind of landfall cards we'll see.
>>44089842
Hallowed Moonlight is still a thing.
>I think a better question would be how will the meta change once khans rotate. What do you guys think?
Well for one, they 3-5 color splash atrocities won't be so prevalent (assuming of course they don't reprint enemy fetches from original zendikar, but considering the landfall mechanic, I think they might).
It's hard to say where the meta will go though. People play abzan and shit, not because of card synergy making a well tuned deck, but literally nothing more than simply a goodstuffs deck filled with value cards. Midrange cards like anafenza and siege rhino are big undercosted creatures with awesome effects on top of it, yet the rest of standard is nowhere near that kind of power level which I think is total bullshit.
When I last played back in original zendikar, there were tons of overpowered cards, but at the very least, the decks had massive synergy. Just look at the synergy that squadron hawks and fetches had with JTMS and stoneforge mystic/swords. That deck had tons of power cards, but at least the rest of standard had ways to combat it in the form of fast efficient removal like doom blade and lightning bolt or catch all responses like oblivion ring. Right now it's such a creature heavy format as almost all noncreature spells don't bring nearly the amount of power or consistency that these creatures have leading to a bland creature heavy meta filled with netdecking and 2nd rate original ideas that can't compete with a trampling 4 mana 4/5 with a free lightning helix.
I really hope oath either brings in more efficient control cards/answers to standard or at the very least tone down the power of these creatures.
>>44089842
Aristocrats also loses Rally (and Bloodsoaked Champion, for UB), cutting down on the power of the deck significantly. With Rhino, the delve cards, and the fetchlands gone, the power level will drop like a rock.
And standard might actually become somewhat affordable, and people might start playing it again. Our last fnm had 4 people in for standard (admittedly, it's a university town and a lot of players have finals, but still). Modern still attracts a solid crowd, and drafts usually make at least 8, but standard has fallen off the radar for most players.
>>44084628
What's with the bitching about control in this thread? Esper dragons is solid deck that can top tournaments when the meta lines up.
>>44090790
Esper Dragons isn't a control deck, it's a midrange deck.
>>44091711
Not sure what kind of delusion you're under, but it's about as control as it gets. Let me guess, Sphinx's Rev control was midrange too, because you often won by attacking with Aetherling? Caw-blade was midrange because often won with hawks and swords? Miracles is midrange because it sometimes wins with angel tokens? If it doesn't go to the full 50 minutes in game 1 and it's only wincon is Elixer of Immortality, it's midrange, not control?
